During the debate, Vice President Biden contradicted sworn testimony by State Department officials before the House Oversight Committee by stating that the administration was unaware of requests for additional security by diplomats in Libya. Yesterday, White House spokesman Jay Carney tried to clarify those comments, and only seemed to put more distance between the upper echelons of the administration and Secretary Clinton:

The vice president was speaking about himself and the president, and the White House. He was not referring to the administration, clearly, since there was a public hearing for four-and-a-half hours where it was discussed openly by individuals working at the State Department, requests that were made. Obviously, he was referring to, he wasn’t talking about the administration writ large, he was speaking about the president, himself, and the White House.

The implication is clear: The secretary of State failed to keep the president informed of the situation on the ground in Libya. If there was a substantial threat to our mission there — and the hearings showed that our diplomats felt that was the case — one would think that the president would have been kept abreast of events in that war-torn country by his secretary of State.

Dare the president ask for Clinton’s resignation? Daily Caller:

But as for the chance that Hillary Clinton would resign, Klein said in the interview: “At this moment, it appears unlikely that she’s going to do that. I mean that would be an extreme step for her to take.”

“Not only would it be hard to predict how it would play out as far as Hillary is concerned in the future, but it would certainly damage Obama’s chances for re-election if she resigned,” he said.

The Clintons have shown an ability over the years to be very pragmatic when it comes to their personal political fortunes. Hillary’s acceptance of the cabinet position — despite her rage at Obama and many of his staffers following a bitter primary campaign — shows that she is perfectly willing to set aside personal feelings to advance her chances for the White House in 2016. Bill Clinton, doing all he can to assist his wife in her probable run for the White House, has also set aside his deep misgivings regarding the president’s abilities and the competence of his staff, and gave a rousing endorsement of Obama at the DNC. How must they both be feeling now that the Obama administration is carefully trying to side step responsibility for the Libyan attack by putting some of the blame on Hillary?

Again, it will depend on how big the issue becomes, but it would be extremely unlikely for Secretary Clinton to resign — or for the Obama White House to ask her to go. The downside for both principals makes a Hillary exit problematic for Obama’s present and for Clinton’s future.

But it is not likely that Hillary will step up and fall on her sword for the president either. Hence, his dilemma — a dilemma that will only be made more difficult if Benghazi continues to bedevil the campaign as an issue.

103 Comments, 42 Threads

The preliminary autopsy report is done but the tox results won’t be done until after the election. The administration is desperate to delay release of the details until after the election since the results are so shocking. Stevens was raped repeatedly while still alive but it is unknown whether he was conscious. Al Queda took him to the hospital so the world would know what they had done, not so he would get help. Obama is in a panic since intelligence intercepts show the terrorists bragging about what they did to Stevens and these details may be released. If the brutal facts don’t come out until after the election, only Clinton will suffer future consequences.

Hillary got on the ‘Obama bus’ when she accepted his job offer. She had to know who else was on it; then – or not long after, her travels began. Dealing with Obama, one thing. Safely resisting the tentacles of Obama,Inc. (including ‘Brotherhood’ Associates) is another. Hillary may get off; fall or be thrown from the bus; but think she may well, be forever stuck between a ‘rock and a hard place’, when her feet hit the ground.

You give Hillary too much credit. She took this job in order to keep a high public profile so she can run again in 2016. She is another of these world government nuts who think that places that can’t even be Nationalized can be Internationalized. What she has never understood is that her goal of an International Democracy closely parallels the Communist Party’s goal of International Totalitarianism at this juncture. She is the highest profile “useful idiot” in what is left of our Republican form of government right now. Hillary’s dream didn’t include a religious caliphate in the Middle East, but the Communists have formed a temporary alliance with radical Islam in order to advance THEIR dreams. Obama is with the Communists. Hillary and her great friend George Soros have caught in the cross fire. ABO2012

The Clintons don’t make any public moves without a reason. Hillary wanted to stay in the public eye in order to be the Democrats’ contender for POTUS in 2016. She has already (before the Libyan debacle) announced that she will be stepping down as Sec. of State at the end of this term. This wil give her four years in which to distance herself from Obama while she and Bill campaign and raise a war chest. They desperately need for Obama to win this year in order for her to keep from facing the incumbant Romney in 2016, rather than an unelected opponent.

Beachbun, I agree with you with one caveat: Hilary has her own Muslim Brotherhood tentacles in the form of her VERY close assistant, Huma Abedin. She is in too deep but remember, Bill and Hilary never take prisoners. Once again, she will need a man’s help, in this case Bill’s to get out of this if she can.

[The vice president was speaking about himself and the president, and the White House. He was not referring to the administration. . . Obviously, he was referring to, he wasn’t talking about the administration writ large, he was speaking about the president, himself, and the White House.]

Who else ‘is’ the White House – that was not ‘so’ informed; and who escapes a ‘writ large’ classification? This is like watching an interview with ‘Alice’; post fall into Wonderland. . .and the ‘wonder’ and obfuscation here; needs only to last until Nov. 6th!

This pales of course; in light of what was NOT done; given that Leadership ‘players’ watched in ‘real time’/by video; the six/seven hour brutal, murderous attack against Chris Stevens and Seal/Staff Associates – and did NOTHING! Save, aid and abet a concocted story of American betrayal against Muslims by way of a you tube video. All to say; ‘they’ knew, from the beginning; ‘what’ was going down here and who the perps were. Blame cast; however; to ‘spare’ Obama; by Obama and ‘for’ Obama – and the Islamists he serves.

And I would like to point out that if the parties were reversed, especially when considering the arrest of the filmmaker we would be facing calls for Watergate-style hearings to know if the White House ordered that to happen as a way to get a scapegoat in order to cover up their own failures. Both the MSM and the Left (BIRM) would be at DEFCON 1 with launch keys released.

They don’t need to; he is still in jail and in ‘isolation’ – for security. Perhaps a less than likeable guy; we don’t really know, ‘for certain’ as we have only Obama’s words per his character; but whatever the case; he does not deserve his life ruined a ‘second’ time (the first, being a Coptic Christian from Egypt)and this time, by ‘land of the Free’. Thanks to ‘our’ President; this man has a life-threatening bounty on his head. Literally. .

Prediction: The Clintons, following Obama’s further drubbing at the next debate, and further plunging in the polls, will soon realize Obama’s days are numbered, and Hillary will resign in protest, referencing the incompetence, dishonesty or malfeasance of the Obama administration, rather than taking the heat herself for the Benghazi debacle. This will “save” the Clinton legacy, and foist the blame on Obama – who will be seen to be losing anyway. The sense of self-preservation in the Clintons is strong.

That’s my sense of things. The Clintons will realize they have more to gain than lose by Hillary resigning in protest. The pros:

- Biden is buried along with Obama, thus eliminating him as a contender in 2016.
- Romney wins the election, thus leaving the country much wealthier and stronger for Hillary to inherit (supposedly) in 2016. The Clintons don’t want to step in after 8 years of Obama.
- Hillary emerges looking principled and post-partisan.
- Bill gets sweet revenge on Barack.

Wouldn’t it be hilarious, though, if 2015 rolls around and some young Hispanic firebrand Obama’s her again?

(Elizabeth Warren was, I think, the first choice, but between her Fauxcahontas problems and the high probability that she was practicing law without a license, I’d guess her brand is nearly as damaged as Obama’s at this point.)

Julian Castro apparently has his own unsavory background: He and his brother are the Hispanic equivalent of Ann Dunham’s “red diaper baby”, raised by a radical mother who was a La Raza operative. Castro’s introduced his mother during his DNC speech and a meaner and more determined looking woman you never saw.

Sorry, that dog won’t hunt. Even the disengaged in the electorate are aware that the ambassador and his security chief requested better security. Why didn’t they get it? That question go away with the murder of a few hapless souls. Also, people are aware that the attack occurred on a RED LETTER day for us, and our Islamist enemies, the eleventh anniversary of 9-11-2001. Why didn’t the smartest in the universe, of all time, pick-up on that and act accordingly?

I agree completely. Some hapless souls will be dealt with between Oct 26, 2012 & Nov 3, 2012. They may or may not have been guilty but they will be dispatched and proclaimed to be guilty. Our Nobel Peace Prize winning drone fleet commander will have avenged the besmirching of his reelection campaign.

Regardless of the outcome in 24 days, It will be Hill-de-beast vs The Grin in ’16.
So Hill has to be very careful. If she resigns before the election she will get blamed for the loss. After the election and she is just another rat jumping ship. Rumor is the White House had to order extra bond to handle all the CV’s running through the copier.

If Obama fires Secretary Clinton before the election, blaming her for the Benghazi fiasco, how many Clinton stalwarts will then refuse to vote for Obama? If she “voluntarily” resigns, the Clinton machine will spin it to smear Obama, and to put Secretary Clinton in the best possible light. This will be bad for Obama, either way.

After the election, assuming an Obama electoral defeat, firing Secretary Clinton would just be pettiness on Obama’s part. If she resigns after the election, it will also be spun by the Clinton machine to place her in the best possible light. Another, “he-done-her-wrong” county-western song will be played.

Agree, Barack can’t fire her. Hillary has indicated she only wanted to be SS one term, I think she’ll spin stepping down in a way that damages him. And that will give Bill encouragement to strike back, as he has been itching to do since the South Carolina primary.

Obama will not fire Hillary, that’s certain. It will hurt him more than it will hurt her on November 6. That is the extra butter on this popcorn. (I’m sorry to talk that way over Chris Stevens’s grave. I’m referring to the Clinton-Obama gladiatorial combat.)

But Hillary has a huge gamble to make.

1) Best-case scenario: Obama wins and no more questions are asked; the MSM buries the whole thing and we’re told it was some murky, John le Carre-style intel failure that we mere Muggles can’t be told for our own good.

2) Worst-case scenario: Romney wins and Obama not only blames Hillary for Benghazi, he and the whole Chicago machine blame her for the Democrats losing the White House and possibly both Congressional houses as well.

In every middle-case scenario, Hillary still goes under the bus. E.g., Obama wins and the story refuses to die (after all, CNN is struggling for ratings and they win more than they lose by Woodwarding this story) and Hillary goes under the bus, seen as sabotaging the first Black president. Et cetera.

It’s the biggest gamble of her life. If she resigns in protest before the election, she might make up her lost Black votes with White women and Latinos in 2016. The women are no problem, but she’ll be ordering Rosetta Stone Spanish tapes by this Christmas.

Hillary is way too much of a politician to blow up the Democratic Party just before a major Presidential election.

Causing that kind of a party split hurts BOTH the Obama (black) wing AND the Clinton (female) wing of the Dem Party. It would give the GOP a landslide win–and the finger-pointing among the Dems after that would hurt all of them.

Instead, they both have a vested interest in burying the issue, until Hillary resigns her position after the election, as she was always planning to do anyway. They’ll cashier the Director of National Intelligence and maybe the director of the CIA as well, to make it look like they’re investigating the intelligence failure.

While I agree overall with much of your post, I think you have your best case a bit off as its extremely unlikely, and you seem to be missing a huge aspect.

More realistically, if Obama does happen to win reelection, this is going to the impeachment process pretty-near instantly. There is just no way the media will be able to avoid the issue, even if they are trying to help cover her and/or Obama.

That said, there is an upcoming event which will push everyones hands – that is, Issa (and/or, but less likely, Lieberman/Collins) calling upon Hillary to testify (/respond to inquiry)

During that testimony, she is almost certainly going to be pressed on the “was the White House told about security concerns/requests” issue, and she will have to decide right then and there if she is taking the fall for the eventual outcome or giving the election to Romney by offering up Obama’s head. Which do you think she will chose?

Obama borrows $3.8 billion everyday. He even borrows the interest he pays on the borrowing. He is the first leader in history to figure out how to have unlimited spending. Not FDR,not Stalin, not even Caesar was able to borrow and print money as Obama has. As for our grandchildren? Heck, they don’t even vote!

Publius, Consider it is not self preservation but rather simply a traitor in the White House…

As VTX layed out…add it up.
.removed security
.lied about the intelligence
.armed the enemy
.knowledge of Steven”s secret meeting with Armed Services Committee Senator Inhoeff
..trying to blame Clapper who has no power… takes this directly to Brennan, another Muslin

Fast and Furious iI…brought to u by the Muslim terrorist in the WH…..
Obama armed AlQaeda with 20,000-30,000 surface to air missiles…enough to take down commercial airliners across the globe…..

The cameras around the compound recorded everything…a witness saw all behind the fire line..my assumption on this…MCKenzie better be in deep hiding

The Drone was in real time communication ….The State Department watched all…and did absolutely NOTHING

Welcome to Barack’s New World Order…

Either the GOP man up and out the traitor in the WH…admit what has happened or go down in flames with the man who wears the ring inscribed “there is no god but Allah”…who was recently out by General Vallelee as refusing to give the order to get Osama for 4 months while they knew where he was…and that Gates, Panetta and Clinton had to move forward behind Obama’s back…informing him after the fact…
Subsequently Obama put in new rules of engagement in Afganistan which killed those 26 Seals….did any think that the US Forces being required to give a flight plan and get permission from the Afgan Military, the Afgam Police, and Afgan Commision before heading to a firefight…with further rules of engagement limiting their rules of firing on the enemy…could the consequences have been any other than the slaughter of those Seal Team 6…It certainly has one thinking payback for killing Osama…but was it the enemy or the Taliban inside the House…inside the White House.

The smiling guy with the high like ability rating has been revealed as a man who has distain for all things American…particularly our military…and certainly all American’s particularly …like it or not, white Americans.
Would one expect a deep cover traitor to show anything but likeability…traitors work to manage emotions…

Time for politicians and military to man up and take the traitor down

Reply

Publius
October 13, 2012 at 7:29 am
ATB: Has Inhofe spoken publicly about a meeting with Amb. Stevens? Am curious about where this story originated because I haven’t seen it anywhere else. Would appreciate a link if you have one to share.

if ol joe and the big Oh didn’t know, and it was Hillary who does, who does she report to? who is in charge here? who is going to the intelligence meetings for the Oh? who is responsible for putting it on the Ohs kindle? questions of the month, what is the chain of command in the Obama administration? who selects the people going under the bus???? do we have a “czar” of the Department of Sacrificial Lambs and Scapegoats?

“Rules of Engagement”, the 2000 film was based on retiring Senator James Webb’s storyline.
I thought of this film re:Benghazi, and also wonder when it will show up on TV.
My guess is one or more of Ted Turner’s cable channels, where Clint Eastwood’s pre-1990 flms suddenly showed up after the RNC. Forgot how intense “Firefox” was.

As for SecClinton? I am fairly certain Susan Rice and Petreaus were Obama/Biden’s targets in this, but now it will be in Hillary’s lap if anyone ever follows up on Ryan’s point about Marine Security at the US Embassy in France. THAT one point has disappeared, but it is central to the issue of WHO decided how to allocate State’s $1.3bil for security, a new definition for “Oops!”

btw, I thought part of Obama’s debate1 problem was that he could not stop thinking “Don’t say Oops”. Biden almost let Oops slip when he forgot the word “sanctions”.

This is “circling-the-wagons” syndrome on full display by this administration. Hillary is an important chess piece for Obama’s Foreign Relations Policy. Her agenda is Bill Clinton Presidency’s agenda (which was her blueprint). Here’s proof:

As Americans, We The People must remember most problems Our Nation is currently facing can be directly traced to Bill Clinton’s Presidency.
A disaster in the making

A nuclear weapons scientist, who has sought anonymity “to keep my position and keep supporting my family,” has informed NewsMax.com that the Clinton administration has, in fact, aggressively sought to provide China with some of the nation’s most closely guarded nuclear weapons technology.
“It seems like every day there are more and more Chinese at Livermore,” he stated. The scientist said the administration had facilitated the transfer of laser technology employed in the process of making nuclear weapons-grade plutonium.

“Early in the 1980′s a process was developed at Lawrence Livermore for producing weapons-grade plutonium,” the scientist explained, revealing for the first time details of a U.S. government project then considered the government’s most important.

This is just the tip of the iceberg regarding Bill Clinton’s years in US Presidency.
1)Signing of H.R. 4655, October 31, 1998, allowing regime change in Iraq. Sadam Hussein’s ouster, later morphing onto Operation Desert Fox.
2)Bill Clinton, as President, visited Vietnam. First to do so since 1969, normalizing trade between US and Vietnam’s commie regime.
3)Bill Clinton signed more than 270 trade liberalization pacts with countries all over the world.
4)Bill Clinton signed into law (October 10, 2000) “US-China Relations Act of 2000,” thus granting China’s commie government “permanent” normal trade relations (PNTR) with USA.
5)He oversaw the 1990’s “Oslo Accords.”
6)In March, 1994, abolished the system of COCOM which barred sophisticated Technology transfers such as the AVLIS-Atomic Vapor Laser Isotope Separation, a sophisticated classified plutonium separation process Chinese spies had for years sought to acquire. Now, Iran has not only this but other enhanced, advanced fissile enriching processes. Note: Hillary cannot condemn Iran for Bill’s Presidencies policies towards China.
7)China now has over 13 missiles aimed at Americas larger cities and some 500 or more nuclear warheads.

This is Bill Clinton’s legacy. He’s also the second sitting President to be impeached for receiving “in kind” donations from foreign governments and individuals (mostly Chinese).

Truly a bastion of probity.
Wake up America. She’s being sold down the river by “greed and power” interests in culture of corruption of Washington DC. Pray. Amen.

Yes, but don’t forget how much Hitlery and the boy who sits in the president’s chair hate one another. It’s “melt lead” hatred. It is interesting that Hitlery’s consolation prize of being made S o’ S is such the predictable failure. One doesn’t need anything but a set of eyes to have seen that train-wreck coming. This, the woman who used to scream at Bill-Jeff for all the white house staff to hear. This, the woman who put pornographic ornaments on the white house Christmas tree.

‘Course, the caped invader is no better. His contempt for normal people is just as bad but when such two singularities collide, it’s never good for anything within a couple of light years’ distance.

Hopefully, they will engage in destroying one another for the next several years.

I have never questioned Bill Clinton’s patriotism before. Hillary, not so much, because I’ve always thought she put her feminist ambitions ahead of everything else, including her marriage vows. But it seems to me that it’s vitally important for *both* of them, if they want to retain respect, power and access to money going into their golden years, to leave this election looking to the American public like they will *not* sell us down the river for Arab (or Chinese or Russian) oil money. The issue both Bill and Hillary must face is not whether they will show fealty to That Person and the DNC, but whether they will show fealty to America and its Constitution. *That* will be Hillary’s 3:00 in the morning phone call. And also, I think Bill needs to take a long look in the mirror, too, while he’s shaving and think about what’s bottom line important in the next month.

All the palace intrigue aside, the Administration and its Sec of State have been a complete disaster. The two together completely mis read the “Arab Spring”. They also screwed the Greens in Iran 3 years ago. We are less respected internationally under this crew than in any time since Carter. Look at what we did to the Poles with missile defense. The cherry on top is the disaster in Afghanistan.

A naive romantic vision of the world and America’s role in it. That’s Obama’s foundation as executed by Hil.

These people are smart, and as cold as steel. Hillary has already made assessments, guesstimates, and decisions. She looked at the 2010 election results, the massive Republican primary field, and Obama’s chances. When should she pull out and race for the prize? Every NASCAR driver is thinking this at each foot for 500 miles. When does she pull a Bobby Kennedy: resign, wait two months, then attack?

She ran against John Edwards last time; Obama was a distant third. Who will be the next front runner next time, if Obama wins? If Obama loses? She will be 70 for the next go. What are her self inflicted wounds?

The Benghazi scandal will hang around her neck. She made lousy decisions which resulted in a successful enemy attack, a dead Ambassador, and two workers. No one, except Obama and she, believes our foreign policies have been improved over the last four years; the Benghazi debacle spin proves the point.

She, and her husband, have lived well off the American taxpayer for decades and will until they go in the ground. When it is no longer rewarding, she will quit. She will, within two years, and stand alone from Obama, and Bill.

“And by the way, at the time we were told exactly — we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view.”

- Joe Biden, at the debate

On the morning of the 12th of September — that would be the morning after the evening President Obama had been briefed that there was an ongoing assault on the Benghazi consulate and the Ambassador was missing and went to bed to get his beauty sleep – the President was told that Stevens and 3 others were dead…evidently, he did not answer the 3 AM phone call or his staff didn’t think it was important enough to tell him…he canceled his PDB and made a statement in the Rose Garden.

The significance of his statement is that, standing next to him, was one Hillary Clinton – THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

Now, why is this important?

The Deputy Assistant of State, Charlene Lamb, has already testified that she was able to follow what happened “in almost real time” from a command centre in Washington. She KNEW what had happened.

Do they really think that we are stupid enough to believe that the Deputy Assistant of State did not tell the Secretary of State what she witnessed “in almost real time” from a command centre in DC and the Secretary of State didn’t tell the President of the United States before she joined him in the Rose Garden for his address to the nation?

In the speech, two things stand out to me
1 – he is already blaming the film (the entire reasoning is geared toward “respect religions”)
2 – he says “Libyan personnel fought back against the attackers along side Americans” (at about the 1:50 mark)

…so, Hillary standing next to him, her people having watched it live and know there was no protest, and she hasnt told him – yet she did tell him that “Libyans fought along side Americans” in trying to defend the consulate?

Her being there and his knowledge really does present a huge kink in the excuse chain – one of the two must have knowingly lied about the attack (her to him, or him to us)

” “Not only would it be hard to predict how it would play out as far as Hillary is concerned in the future, but it would certainly damage Obama’s chances for re-election if she resigned,” he said.”

Holy Cow! That would be the ideal results for the Clintons. They’ve always prided themselves on pitching to the middle. Who needs the collapsing 20% of the electorate liberals can claim as their own? They could peel off enough beholdens, like the union trolls and the dependent minorities they love so much. Added to independents and moderate Republicans, they could probably swing a win. The wing-nuts like Code Pink, academia, and Bob Borosage & The Nation’s communists, can go the way of the dodo.

Firing or chastizing Hillary would be a slap at both of the Clintons, and Obama simply cannot afford to lose their good will right now. Bill Clinton is the only national Democrat who can actually speak to the swing voters, and if Hillary is blamed, Bill stops working for Obama.

Ergo, Obama will continue to finesse the blame for the Bengazi tragedy, in the same way he’s protected and finessed Holder’s culpability in Fast and Furious.

When you are “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t” you don’t do anything.

At least until after the election. When obumma loses this election he might just try and bring the whole house of cards down on top of himself. And Hillary/Bill are probably at the top of his political “hit list.” He will burn Hillary and smile while doing that. Which is a nice fall-out from this Libyan mess, if you ask me. (Never let a crisis go to waste!)

But, he will make sure he is the only one that crawls out from the rubble. He is not finished yet… I’m sure he has his eyes on something bigger. Maybe the UN, who knows.

I spent a decade in Washington D.C. as a member of the ‘Intelligence Community’. It looks to me like the White House has been thrown under the bus. You wait, a memo will turn up showing that the White House was indeed briefed on the piss-poor security in Libya. Super-glue the Won’s balls to the rail road track and see what he does when the train comes.
Couldn’t happen to a more deserving fellow.

From the moment Susan Rice made the rounds on the Sunday talk shows, I smelled a rat. By time (Sept 16) the blogosphere had already questioned the protest-in-reaction-to-a-video story vis-a-vis the attack and killings in Benghazi. Why was Susan Rice the mouthpiece of the administration’s made up story? Mr. O told Hillary to do it. She looked him straight in the eye and said “No friggin’ way. Your story stinks. Get someone else to lie for you.” Or something to that effect. Susan Rice said she would do it if Mr. O would promise to make her Secretary of State in his second term…

Can we finally put a fork in the Obama- Clinton thing. I mean we elect the first black president and he has divided us and shown how he was not the best person for the job. Now we have to hope that Hillary does not get the blame so she can be the first women president. Please, when will this country put the country ahead of what looks good in the eyes of the world. What comes after Hillary? The first hispanic president or the first gay president or asian, jew, indian, ect. president. How about the BEST person for the job. This is getting crazy!

No, he is like #6. Google it. Lincoln was half black too. His father had 2 farms seized in Kentucky, That was because a black man wasn’t allowed to own land in Kentucky. It is a matter of public record.
Old Hickory, Andrew Jackson, was dogged by rumors his entire life;
“A rumor of Jackson having “colored blood”, meaning having “Negro” ancestry,[8] was unproven. He referred to a charge that his “Mother … [was] held to public scorn as a prostitute who intermarried with a Negro, and [that his] … eldest brother [was] sold as a slave in Carolina.”[9][10]”
His eldest brother WAS sold as a slave, AFAIK, the bill of sale still exists.

Race pretty much wasn’t a serious issue in the early days of America.
Black men fought alongside their white American brothers at Breeds Hill, just as they did on the retreat from Chosin and the advance on Baghdad.
Race as an issue was created by politicians in the mid 19th century. They exploited it in the same way Hitler did 100 years later. Tell the people that all their problems are the result of some minority group ( N*ggers. J*ws, etc.) and if they voted for the politician in question he would fix the problem.
One politician, I forget which one, bragged that his mother was half Amerid, half black and by voting for him, you would get the best of all the races. IIRC, He won.

The same people who own Comrade Obama own the Clintons; the Clintons can do what the Soros Cabal tells them to do or something will come out about the Middle Eastern funding of His library and luxurious lifestyle, or maybe it is technology transfers to China or others, or maybe it is God-Knows-What. Be that as it may, the Clintons’ chain got yanked really, really hard in ’08 and they came to heel for Obama’s masters. They’ll do what they’re told.

Agreed. They’re leftists before they’re anything else. But, personally, it’s starting to look to me like they designed the BHO presidency as a single stage rocket, made to deliver a single ungodly awful payload then burn up in the atmosphere after mission accomplished. The scary part is…. Who’s the second stage?

Read any of my other stuff here and elsewhere? Grandpa was a communist. The family lived in Harry Bridges’ towns, Seattle and Hawaii. They lived far beyond their evident means. Of course he’s a made man of the CPUSA. The demise of the Comintern and the fall of the USSR changed things a bit, but he, Axelrod, Ayers, and the rest still have the same objectives. It’s easier actually now that they don’t have to defend Stalin.

First heard the term ‘red diaper baby’ in one of your posts. It was detailed and memorable. Haven’t seen your posts elsewhere, as I only read comments on PJM.

I’m a recent conservative having grown up liberal in the suburbs of NYC. I’m still a registered Dem. Never thought or discussed politics as a kid, never had too. All the people and friends I knew thought alike. The same is true as an adult living and working in Manhattan — never discussed politics, only work. I can’t think of anyone I knew or came in contact with in 25 years of work that I would’ve labeled ‘Republican’. I’d guess it’s similar to Roger Simon describing his adventures in Hollywood. I used to read the Sunday NY Times all the way through every week. It was a ritual. Not any more. Today, I’m old, I’m cranky and I’m tired of being lied to.

I used to be a very heavy poster at RedState; almost always on the Recommended Diary list, often at the top. Then I started to get crossways with Erick and his puppies first over their endorsement of a Democrat, Begich, over Sen. Stevens; told them Stevens was being mau-maued, and then their endorsement of that nutcase Miller over Sen. Murkowski cinched it. Told them what I thought of them and got banned for it.

RedState used to be a very active community and the Diarists were often more interesting and better writers than the Front Page contributors. Of course, that bothered some of the front pagers and especially Erick. Since he got the gig with CNN, he’s become insufferable and they’ve managed to ban pretty much anybody who doesn’t worship Erick. They just did a re-do and went to Discus, so I don’t know if they still have all the old Diaries archived. A friend posted as Vassar Bushmills and I just posted as achance; if they’re still accessible, there’s some good stuff there as we tried starting as soon as Obama seemed serious to explain to people what a real communist looks like and how this guy really was one.

This is like a game of musical chairs. The music is about to stop and somebody is going to be left without a chair to sit in, and I think it’s going to be Hillary. This scandal is NOT going away, not with four dead Americans in the mix. Soon, Issa’s committee in Congress is going to want to know who was informed of the bad security in Libya and how high up the food chain it went. If you think the career bureaucrats are going to take the fall for Hillary, you’re nuts. They’re going to protect their own butts. And it seems impossible that immediately AFTER the attack, EVERYBODY at the White House was not informed of what really happened. Heck, the State Department has already admitted that they knew immediately that this was a terrorist attack and not a riot due to a stupid video. Are you’re telling me that the State Department didn’t share this information immediately with Hillary, the Secretary of State? And are you also telling me that after they found out that the ambassador was killed, they still didn’t tell either Hillary or the White House what really happened and that it took roughly two weeks for Obama to admit it was a terrorist attack? No, Hillary is going down, and soon, probably in the next week. Obama is NOT going to want this hanging over him during the last debate which is, ironically, on foreign policy.

The music is about to stop and Hillary is going to be the one without a chair.

Musical chairs, nice analogy. I think it depends on who runs fastest for that chair.

The music may stop Monday.

Obama (to Hillary): You’re fired.
Hillary: Too late pardner, I done quit. The MSM is publishing my statement about your lies and incompetence in this matter at this very moment. If you don’t go before the press within one hour and absolve me of all responsibility, my people have instructions to release the, ahem, rest of my statement. It includes, ahem, everything. That gives you t-minus 59 minutes to concoct a story of your own. I’ll leave my phone on.

Does no one remember the Rose Law Firm billing records?
Hillary Care?
Hillary on the stand saying to every question,” I don’t remember that”?
Hillary getting off the plane in Bosnia and claiming to be fired upon when no one else on the plane even heard a shot?
The woman is a liar, plain and simple. She also has Marxist tendencies. I am old enough to know that people rarely change. We forget that at our peril.

Of course that assumes the latter two Directors will go quietly and that their underlings, who are already incensed at the blame-it on-failed-intel bullchit, will not become even more vocal and spill more “secrets”.If Clapper and Panetta agree to fall on their respective swords they will end their careers as public buffoons whose incompetence resulted in the Benghazi murders.

We’re told that Hilary Clinton,Panetta,and Gates made the decision to kill Osama without consulting Obama. If that is true then it’s certainly plausible that she made the decisions regarding security at Benghazi WITHOUT consulting Biden or Obama.

Go ahead, Barack, give her the ol’ heave ho! And good riddance. Your time on the world stage is over. You will lose in a landslide mere weeks from now. Might as well destroy Hill & Billy on your way out. God knows it would be no loss to the nation.

Dear Leader has no choice if he wants to try and weasel out of responsibility….but, honestly, is it not Hilary’s responsibility firstly as Sec State….and by extension also Dear Leader’s? If the cover up gains more traction it will take both of them down, thank God.

For what it’s worth, I voted for Clinton both times. I really liked him. I hated that whole ‘Whitewater’ thing. I didn’t care about Monica Lewinsky. I also liked that Hillary supported Bill in a kinda “Stand-By-Your-Man” way. I probably also voted for Hillary when she ran for Senator.

Now I can’t stand either one of them. I didn’t know about the release of the Puerto Rican terrorists when it happened. Like most people, I was too busy working to keep track what was going on.

The implication is clear: The secretary of State failed to keep the president informed of the situation on the ground in Libya. If there was a substantial threat to our mission there — and the hearings showed that our diplomats felt that was the case — one would think that the president would have been kept abreast of events in that war-torn country by his secretary of State.

The President was told about the death of his Ambassador and yet got on his toy plane and flew to Las Vegas demonstrating that Ambassadors don’t mean anything during an election campaign.

Then Biden claimed that he and the President did not know anything which is a clear admission of incompetence. They are not supposed to be sittin g on their bums waiting for someone to tell them: they have resources (I am quite sure they knew, and are running away from responsibility).

Blaming others has been a standard routine for irresponible Obama.
I agree with Mike that if Hillary had integrity she would resign, but we all must remember that Hillary and Bill and Barry and Joe all DO NOT have integrity, so….

If the truth ever comes out about our Liar-in-Chief, I think we’ll find that Obama let it known to his inner circle that he did want to be kept informed about about anything — except possibly his poll numbers.

It always amazes me how PJ Media is constantly changing narratives and pushing it to the public to see which narrative will stick it to the Obama Administration. Like I said in my previous posts in other threads, if you can fool the majority by just changing one minor fact or narrative and keep pushing it to the public, the handful of the few that catches it can no longer shift or change the momentum of your course or agenda.

No one has thrown anybody under the bus and Bill Clinton is back in the campaign game big time for the Obama Administration. Bill Clinton and the boss, Bruce Springsteen, will headline a rally on behalf of the president in Parma, Ohio, on Thursday of next week. Keep pushing your narratives and see which one will stick, PJ Media. I commend you for working so hard for the boss but the real hypocrisy of this incident is that, there was one other incident that deserves our attention and the American public completely overlooked it.

In 2003, George W. Bush mislead the American public by pushing for the Iraq War. He stated that Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destructions (WMD) posed a threat to U.S. security and our allies around the world. He also hinted of a connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. After all of the sanctions failed and U.N. Security Council’s weapon inspectors being denied into Iraq for inspections, we declared war and invaded Iraq.

The casualties of the Iraq War costs 4,487 U.S. military soldiers their lives; wounded 32,226 U.S. military soldiers; and other injuries included 47,541 U.S. military soldiers. The number of U.S. contractors that were deployed to Iraq to help in the rebuilding process reported 1,554 contractors killed and 43,880 contactors wounded.

To this very day, there has been no evidence of Iraq having any weapons of mass destructions (WMD) or any ties to Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaida. Does the Benghazi incident even come anywhere close to the Iraq War? Can anybody prove that the Obama Administration purposely lowered security so that our ambassadors overseas can be under harm’s way?

Here is one last thought for everybody, Paul Ryan was the one who pushed in the House of Representatives as part of the deficit budget, to lower spending on security expenses on U.S. embassies overseas and he got it on the budget plan. This was accomplished much prior to the Benghazi terrorist attack.

Here is a few last thoughts for #36 Rob: After the Benghazi disaster Obama ordered security redoubled at American Embassies overseas with a unit of 50 Marines each. He could have done this at anytime. It has nothing to do with budget cuts!

In typical liberal delusional fashion – you are
a)Equating a celebrity endorsement as proof of your candidate’s competence
b)Blaming Bush
c)Decrying the evils of war while saying there’s not enough military
d)Spinning history to create the illusion of “facts”

As I had mentioned in posts from other threads, can you or anybody prove that the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, knew far in advance that extra security was needed at the Benghazi U.S. embassy? Do you also know that the U.S. embassies are all run by the State Department and that the Secretary of State is at the very top of the State Department? The White House does not run the U.S. embassies unless there is a major tragedy that requires the executive decision of the president immediately. Does this make sense? Can you keep pushing this issue without a single proof?

By the way, I am an ex Republican that have witnessed all the hypocrisy of this party, since the inception of the Tea Party. I don’t mind you calling me a liberal now because I rather be a liberal than a party that completely bends to the Tea Party. I can now honestly say that the Republican Party is no longer and the Tea Party reigns supreme in this party now.

“In 2003, George W. Bush mislead the American public by pushing for the Iraq War. He stated that Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destructions (WMD) posed a threat to U.S. security and our allies around the world.”

Propaganda if not an outright lie!
Here is a URL to Congress’s authorization of the use of military force against Iraq;http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.J.RES.114:
You will find there were 23 reasons given for the war. WMD was only 1 of those reasons. The media jumped on that reason because if it bleeds, it leads.
WMD were found. Several times. Those WMD’s were not in any great quantity, but that doesn’t matter. I’m not going to play hit the moving goal posts with some deranged liberal. One WMD of any type was enough to establish the existence of WMD. It is a binary test. On off, yes no;
Where the Bush administration screwed the pooch was in allowing the WMD fantasy to stand. They should have said that the invasion was under the 1991 UN resolution. That Operation Desert Storm was stopped by truce and the Iraqi’s had violated that truce so the War was on again and no truce would be accepted this time.

http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2006/1083/
{snipped}
“The Iraq Survey Group (ISG) has found “hundreds of cases of activities that were prohibited” under UN Security Council resolutions. The ISG reported to Congress that the evidence they had found on the ground in Iraq showed Saddam’s regime was in “material violation” of UN Security Council Resolution 1441, which promised “serious consequences” if Iraq did not make a complete disclosure of its weapons programs and dismantle them in a verifiable manner. According to the ISG, Iraq had “a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses with equipment that was suitable to continuing its prohibited chemical- and biological-weapons programs.” As well as prohibited, long-range, ballistic, and scud missile programs, and even equipment for uranium-equipment centrifuges.”

The lies you repeated were intended to discredit President Bush and set the stage for the ’08 political campaign. The facts are that Operation Iraqi Freedom was both legal AND successful. We won the war and lost the peace, not an unusual result for America. Repeating a lie over and over will NOT make it the truth.

Ok stoicheion, I know when I’ve been bested. You are absolutely right. Shortly after the Saddam regime was toppled by the U.S. Coalition Forces, the news medias all across the U.S. had reported for months on end that we found WMDs all over Iraq. It was showing up in every corner of every city all across the country. The U.S. Coalition Forces found stockpiles upon stockpiles of WMDs in every Iraqi city that they came across. This was the main evidence that we needed to justify this war and we found it beyond our wildest dreams. All of the news medias across the U.S. were having a media frenzy over the enormity of Saddam’s WMD stockpile. They have never seen anything like this and are applauding President Bush for a great mission accomplishment.

It took the U.S. Coalition Forces months to haul all of the WMDs into the U.S. aircraft carriers and it took multiple aircraft carriers to hold the enormity of Saddam’s WMD stockpile. There were so many ballistic and scud missiles. There were so many large containers of chemical and biological weapons. Never had the world seen anything like this since the Nazi regime.

The only major problem with this story is, oh yeah, that’s right, I found myself waking up and staring at my ceiling because it was just a dream. In reality, none of any of the events that I had described happened so for you to claim that one survey group had reported to Congress of small signs of chemical weapons was just a way of looking for justification for this war. If this was such big news, why was there no reports of this in any news media across the U.S.? The answer to this is that it wasn’t significant enough for any news media to report.

Hey Rob, how about cutting the crap and start telling the truth. For one example, please show me any evidence that Ryan, or anyone else for that matter, voted for reductions in embassy security.
Never happened. The Dems made it up.
And you swallowed it.

Hey livermoron, how about cutting the crap and start telling the truth. For one example, please show me any evidence that Hillary, or anyone else high up for that matter, had any pre-knowledge about extra security needed in embassy security.
Never happened. The Repubs made it up.
And you swallowed it.

How does it feel when a point is put out and you can neither prove or disprove it? How does it feel when the shoes are switched? It’s not my place to prove it for you, it’s for you to try and disprove my point. It is all true what I said about Paul Ryan.

It sure has been fun watching Hillary and Barack squirm for the last five weeks. They both want to blame an intelligence failure for the Libya terrorist attack. I hope this ends up destroying the political careers of both of them, because they are both to blame for the loss of their Ambassador to Libya. I think the Communist Susan Rice will get ruined for the gratuitous lies she told to five different TV networks in one morning. But the reason for dumping Hill and Barry is that they are hapless puppets of the Communist insurgents running the Democrat Party. They are in so deep they can not ever extract themselves. MY father liked to say that when you sleep with dogs, you will wake up with fleas. ABO2012

Hillary will be thrown under the bus and Bill doesn’t seem to care… enough said… and Biden saying intelligence will let us know about iran; is that the same intel agency he threw under the bus the other night….

If Obama wants to blame Hillary and she refuses to fall on her sword, Obama and his allies can blame her for strongly supporting the anti-American hard Left in Guatemala. Considering its president is committed to co-governing with the hard Left, Guatemala will very likely deteriorate into social conflict and increasing violence and narcotrafficking. While this won’t happen before the election, its near inevitability will be a vulnerability for Clinton in any future conflict with the Obama people and in any future bid for the presidency.